1. Corn (Zea mays L.) Leaf Angle and Emergence as Affected by Seed Orientation at Planting
Guilherme Torres, Jacob Vossenkemper, William Raun, John Solie and Randy Taylor
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences
Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering
Oklahoma State University

2. Introduction Increasing Yield Plant population (Cox 2001).
80,000 and 116,000 plants/ha
Reducing row spacing (Lutz et al. 1971).
40, 30, and 15 inches
Leaf architectures of modern corn hybrids (Stewart et al. 2003).

3. Rationale Stinson and Moss (1960)
When soil moisture and nutrients are satisfactory light can be the primary ecological factor limiting grain yields.
Peters (1961)
Systematic orientation of corn leaves using seed planting techniques provides means for capturing more sunlight and more efficient soil shading.
Donald (1963)
Leaf geometry and its effects on light distribution with crop and levels of photosynthesis offer potential strategies for improving production efficiency.
Stewart et al. (2003)
Leaf architecture of modern corn hybrids can optimize light interception to increase grain yield.

4. Rationale cont.
More homogenous corn stands have 1. Less interplant competition, increased light interception, reduced weed pressure, (quicker canopy closure). 2. Ability to potentially increase seeding rates while substantially increasing corn grain yields. 3. Reduce seeding rates and maintain grain yields.

5. Light Interception Pendlenton et al. (1967)
35 % yield increase in corn when aluminum reflectors were used to provide additional light to the middle and lower leaves
Reichert et al. (1958) and Stinson and Moss (1960)
Reductions in grain yield when artificial shading was used to reduce available light
Sujatha et al. (2004)
Found that in irrigated production systems, prostate leaf architectures from the corn hybrids could assist in integrated weed management with the potential to decrease herbicide rates.

6. Emergence Hodgen et al. (2007) Daft et al. (2008) Martin et al. (2005)
Found that if corn plants are delayed by as little as four days, the yield depression of that individual delayed plant was as much as 15 percent.
Daft et al. (2008)
Heterogeneous corn plant stands can lead to over application of fertilizers, pesticides and supplemental irrigation because these late emerging plants compete for nutrients, and produce little to no yield.
Martin et al. (2005)
Homogenous corn plant stands and emergence may decrease plant-to-plant variation and could lead to increased grain yields.

7. Objective
Identify which seed placement and arrangement could result in plant architecture with leaves orientated perpendicularly to the row and understand the effect of seed position on emergence.
With-row
Leaf orientation
Across-row

8. Greenhouse Trials Materials and Methods
Planted 2.5 cm deep
Medium flats
10 seeds per treatment
Redi-earth
Adobe Illustrator CS4 software
Emergence
Leaf angle
Analysis of variance
Frequency distribution
Angle ranges (%)

9. Leaf angle Deviation from the corn row Between 0° and 90° Angle ranges
0 ° to 30 ° (with-row)
30 ° to 60 °
60 ° to 90 ° (across-row)
Leaf symmetry

10. Experiment #1 (E1) Experiment #2 (E2) Pioneer 33B54 6 treatments
3 leaf stage
Experiment #2 (E2)
Pioneer 33B54
13 treatments
4 leaf stage

11. Experiment #3 (E3) 5 Dekalb hybrids 8 treatments 4 leaf stage
DKC6122RR2
DKC6172RR2
DKC6346RR2
DKC6342VT3
DKC6169VT3
8 treatments
4 leaf stage
400 seeds

12. Frequency distribution
Results (E1)
Source of variation df
Leaf Angle
Emergence
Frequency distribution
Replication 9 ** NS
Treatment 5
plants with leaf angle between 0° and 30° degrees
plants with leaf angle between 60° and 90° degrees
MSE 58
313.58
0.12
Treatment means N
Mean
Standard deviation
Degrees % 1
57.0
28.2
4.3
0.50
22.2
66.7 2 10
18.7
4.8
0.42
0.0
70.0 3
67.8
14.4
5.0
0.00
10.0
90.0 4
67.2
18.4
18.8
19.7
4.4
0.51
80.0 6
20.6
16.9
SED
7.92
0.15
C.V. 36 7

13. Frequency distribution
Results (E2)
Source of variation df
Leaf Angle
Emergence
Frequency distribution
Replication 9 NS **
Treatment 12
plants with leaf angle between 0° and 30° degrees
plants with leaf angle between 60° and 90° degrees
MSE
105
413.65
0.12
Treatment means N
Mean
Standard deviation
Degrees % 1
51.0
18.0
6.6
0.51
22.2
44.4 2 10
65.6
16.8
6.7
0.48
0.0
80.0 3
47.4
19.3
7.3
20.0
70.0 4
62.4
27.8
6.3
30.0
40.0 5
29.0
13.0
6.0
0.00
10.0 6
31.5
17.3
6.1
0.31
60.0 7
45.6
23.1
6.9 8
48.0
23.7
7.1
62.0
14.9
0..31
77.8
68.9
19.4
90.0 11
57.0
19.7
7.0
55.6
54.8
22.4 50 13
RANDOM
54.9
21.8
SED
9.09
0.15
C.V. 39

14. Frequency distribution
Results (E3)
Source of variation df
Leaf Angle
Emergence
Frequency distribution
Replication 9 NS
Treatment 7 **
Hybrid 4 *
plants with leaf angle between 0° and 30° degrees
plants with leaf angle between 60° and 90° degrees
MSE
309
311.77
0.26
Treatment means N
Mean
Standard deviation
Degrees % 1 50
62.6
17.2
6.4
1.05
8.0
72.0 2 45
51.4
18.4
8.3
1.11
22.2
60.0 3
64.7
15.4
6.1
0.68
4.0
76.0 49
38.8
17.0
6.8
1.10
46.9
20.4 5
47.8
18.1
7.0
0.55
32.0
38.0 6
66.3
14.17
0.75
86.0
20.8
0.72
50.0 8
RANDOM
48.8
17.8
0.99 28
48.0
SED
7.89
0.23
C.V. 33

15. Discussion Fortin and Pierce (1996) Bowers and Hayden (1972)
Found that random orientation of seed resulted in random ear leaf azimuths
Bowers and Hayden (1972)
Flat orientation (hypocotyl up) consistently had better emergence (beans)
Patten and Van Doren Jr. (1970)
Proximal end of the seed down resulted in earlier more complete emergence with more seedling growth

16. Field Trial – Materials and Methods
RCBD
Row Orientation: North-South
Row spacing: 30 inches
Light interception, V10 and R1
(LI-1400)
Grain yield at harvest
Corn Hybrids
Prostate leaf pattern - P0902HR
Upright leaf pattern - P1173HR
(within incomplete factorial arrangement)
Seed Orientation
Upright, caryopsis pointed down, parallel to the row
Laying flat, embryo up, caryopsis pointed perpendicular to the row
Random
Plant Population (in thousands of seeds / acre
Irrigated trial – 20, 30 and 40
Dry land trial -15, 20 and 25
Row orientation

18. Objective
Development of innovative crop management to improve/maintain yields (reduce pesticides and fertilizer rates).
2 fixed seed orientations and random
3 populations
2 corn hybrids (differing leaf structure)
Prostrate and erect
Dry-land and irrigated conditions
Light interception
Grain yield

22. Discussion Toler et al. (1999)
Differences in light interception between leaf orientations decrease with maturity.
No differences were found in plant population.
Across row -10% to 20 % higher corn yields than the random and with-row leaf orientation.
Sujatha et al. (2004)
50% less light reached the ground between rows of horizontal leaf hybrid compared with upright leaf in both years.

23. Conclusions
Placement and arrangement of corn seed can influence rate of emergence and leaf orientation.
At V10 fixed seed planting intercept more light than random seed planting.
At R1upright seed position intercept more light than random.
Effect of seed orientation on light interception was independent of plant population and hybrid.
Difference in light interception decreases with maturity.
Controlled leaf geometry could facilitate planting higher populations with the potential for increasing grain yield or permit the preservation of yields with reduced plant populations.

24. Questions